3 ms·

After this: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/06/internet-a-human-right/ http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/06/internet-a-human-ri... How can they cont

After this: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/06/internet-a-human-right/ http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/06/internet-a-human-ri... How can they continue to say that "not allowing disconnection" is a "massive blow" to the music industry? That's almost like saying abolishing slavery is a massive blow to some industry's labor force. Are they trying to say their profits are more important than a Human Right? That's mainly a rhetorical question. I realize that's how they actually think, and they couldn't care less about freedom of speech or some other silly human right, if they think they have an impact on their revenues. This is why they and their supporters in Congress want to pass SOPA/PIPA regardless of how many experts we bring to speak against it.

pyre 15y ago
The UN report declared that taking away all access to the Internet over claims of copyright infringement was too large of a punishment for the crime. And one of the U.N.'s human rights is a functional justice system (or something like that). By the logic that says that UN is saying that the Internet is a human right, theft is a human right because I say that the death penalty for stealing $1 worth of stuff is too large of a punishment.
- greenyoda 15y ago
  Punishment for the crime? What crime? Under this system there is no actual determination that a crime has been committed. That can only be done via due process of the legal system, not by a copyright holder making an assertion to an ISP. Is it really a good idea to be able to punish somebody because two corporations agree that he should be punished? And the punishment could be severe -- if you're a self-employed software developer, depriving you of internet access could cost you your livelihood.
  - pyre 15y ago
    "The punishment doesn't fit the crime" is a turn of phrase. If I see a parent kick a child because the child was annoying the parent and say, "the punishment doesn't fit the crime," is your first reaction, "BUT THAT CHILD WASN'T CONVICTED IN A COURT OF LAW! DON'T CALL IT A CRIME! RETRACT THAT STATEMENT IMMEDIATELY! PARSE ERROR!" Also, you seem to be mistaking that I agree with 3-strikes laws due to my comment. The point of my comment was that the parroting of "The UN thinks the Internet is a human right," is wrong. If the UN really thought that the Internet was a human right, then every country that didn't supply free Internet to its citizens would be guilty of 'human rights violations.'
    - throwaway64 15y ago
      the RIAA is not my parent, nor a court of law, due process exists for a reason.
      - pyre 15y ago
        Yes, of course. Because in all of my comments, I was advocating the MPAA/RIAA position. </sarcasm>
- duggan 15y ago
  No, by that logic, life is a human right, because I say the death penalty for stealing $1 worth of stuff is too large a punishment.

pyre 15y ago

The UN report declared that taking away all access to the Internet over claims of copyright infringement was too large of a punishment for the crime. And one of the U.N.'s human rights is a functional justice system (or something like that). By the logic that says that UN is saying that the Internet is a human right, theft is a human right because I say that the death penalty for stealing $1 worth of stuff is too large of a punishment.

greenyoda 15y ago
Punishment for the crime? What crime? Under this system there is no actual determination that a crime has been committed. That can only be done via due process of the legal system, not by a copyright holder making an assertion to an ISP. Is it really a good idea to be able to punish somebody because two corporations agree that he should be punished? And the punishment could be severe -- if you're a self-employed software developer, depriving you of internet access could cost you your livelihood.
- pyre 15y ago
  "The punishment doesn't fit the crime" is a turn of phrase. If I see a parent kick a child because the child was annoying the parent and say, "the punishment doesn't fit the crime," is your first reaction, "BUT THAT CHILD WASN'T CONVICTED IN A COURT OF LAW! DON'T CALL IT A CRIME! RETRACT THAT STATEMENT IMMEDIATELY! PARSE ERROR!" Also, you seem to be mistaking that I agree with 3-strikes laws due to my comment. The point of my comment was that the parroting of "The UN thinks the Internet is a human right," is wrong. If the UN really thought that the Internet was a human right, then every country that didn't supply free Internet to its citizens would be guilty of 'human rights violations.'
  - throwaway64 15y ago
    the RIAA is not my parent, nor a court of law, due process exists for a reason.
    - pyre 15y ago
      Yes, of course. Because in all of my comments, I was advocating the MPAA/RIAA position. </sarcasm>
duggan 15y ago
No, by that logic, life is a human right, because I say the death penalty for stealing $1 worth of stuff is too large a punishment.